- RT @MoneyMatters: Frugal teen buys house with 4-H winnings http://bit.ly/amVvkV #
- RT @MoneyNing: What You Need to Know About CSAs Before Joining: Getting the freshest produce available … http://bit.ly/dezbxu #
- RT @freefrombroke: Latest Money Hackers Carnival! http://bit.ly/davj5w #
- Geez. Kid just screamed like she'd been burned. She saw a woodtick. #
- "I can't sit on the couch. Ticks will come!" #
- RT @chrisguillebeau: U.S. Constitution: 4,543 words. Facebook's privacy policy: 5,830: http://nyti.ms/aphEW9 #
- RT @punchdebt: Why is it “okay” to be broke, but taboo to be rich? http://bit.ly/csJJaR #
- RT @ericabiz: New on erica.biz: How to Reach Executives at Large Corporations: Skip crappy "tech support"…read this: http://www.erica.biz/ #
Playing For Blood
Kris at Every Tips and Thoughts wrote a post about games and letting her kids win feeling bad about winning. I disagree. This post is an expansion of my comment there.
When we play games in my house, we play for blood. I’ve never let my kids win and they know it. From the first time the kids attempt Memory, they know they’ve got to earn a win against Mom and Dad. They know if they lose, they must do so gracefully. If they pout or cry, they lose game privileges for a while. I demand good sportsmanship, win or lose.
To be clear, my kids are 3, 4, and 11 and they are all held to the same standards of sportsmanship. Win or lose, they will do so gracefully. There will be no temper tantrums when they are Sorry’d and no pouting when the Queen is captured.
It took my son almost 3 years to beat me at chess. When it finally happened, he was almost as proud as I was and still talks about it 5 years later.
It’s not much fun playing games with his friends. They were coddled and expect to win everything. I have to take away game privileges just like I do for my 3 year old. They hate that because we have the coolest board games. Nobody else has games that involve zombies or disembodied brains.
What has the result been?
My kids love playing games. This week, my oldest has been teaching his sisters how to play Life. When he visits his friends, he’s as likely to bring a board game as an electronic game. He’s got a good mind for strategy, and I can’t remember the last time he pouted when I tromped him.
My 4 year old hasn’t mastered gamesmanship yet, but she will. When I threaten to put the game away, she wipes her eyes, and keeps playing, even if her jaw is chattering. She knows what is expected and works to live up to it.
Both of the older kids are competitive. They’ve never had a win handed to them, and they have each had wins they had to work for, and they know how it feels to win and earn it.
The youngest doesn’t care if she wins, she’s just happy to play. In my experience, the competitive gameplay gene doesn’t activate until 4.
In my mind, the real world won’t hand them any wins, so I might as well start teaching them how to work for it now.
How about you? Do you let your kids win, or do you teach them that all games are bloodsports?
Good Friday
We don’t have daycare on Good Friday.
We do, however, both have to work today. Two rounds of little-girl tonsillitis have zapped our available vacation time.
On an entirely related note, we put our 12 year old son through Red Cross babysitter training a few weeks ago, just for something like this.
My wife gets nervous at the idea of leaving the girls with the boy for very long. I think she thinks the world will explode if he takes care of them correctly.
Our solution for today is to have a slightly older friend come over and help.
She’s 13 and she brought her 10 year old brother with her.
That’s kids aged 3,5,10,12, and 13 in my house today. Total Lord of the Flies.
Hold that thought.
My son, being 12, doesn’t feel it’s necessary to brush his hair for school, or change his clothes every day, and he needs to be reminded to brush his teeth.
This morning, he woke himself up and ran into the bathroom. He emerged with clean teeth and combed hair. I asked him if he was wearing the same shirt as yesterday, and he flew into his room to change.
Hmm. Something is afoot.
While I was putting my shoes on, I reminded him to take care of the house and his sisters, and he made some smart-aleck joke in response.
She giggled.
Watson, I think I’ve found a clue.
Her father told me, just yesterday, the she thinks boys are gross.
The boy has never shown an interest in girls, until this morning.
Grr. The next decade just got considerably more interesting.
Time to lock them both in their respective basements until college.
Focusing on the Now
My company uses a service called KnowYourCompany, that sends three emails each week to the entire staff. Each email asks a question that the staff can either respond to publicly, or just to the company leadership team.
The questions follow a formula.
On Monday, we get an email asking what we are working on. This allows us to see what everyone is doing, and in theory, makes offering your skills easier to do because you can see what you might be able to help with.
On Wednesday, the question is something about the company or our interaction with the company. One week this question was as simple as “Are there any company policies that aren’t completely clear?”
On Friday, the question is more personal. It’s a getting-to-know-each-other question. Last Friday’s question was “What’s something you want to do in the next year that you’ve never done before?”
I found that I don’t have an answer.
Right now, I don’t have any long-term goals. Recently, my personal life has been complicated enough that the idea of planning for later this year–much less the next 5 or 10 years–is more than I can deal with.
My side hustle goals are focused entirely on what needs to happen in the next week. Work goals are only a month out. My personal goals involve making it through the next few days without letting anything collapse.
Sometimes, life kicks you in the crotch so hard, you have to let the future worry about itself while you focus on what’s happening right now. Without a functional present, the future doesn’t matter. You have to focus on the Now first, or everything else evaporates.
It’s not a great situation, but it is an interesting perspective. I’ve spent so much of the last decade focusing on what comes next that what’s happening right now has suffered.
Focus on Now. Sometimes, What’s Next can take care of itself for a while.
The High Cost of Keeping Richard Ramirez in Prison
Serial killers in the United States often gain cult status due to their strange courtroom antics and dramatic personalities. Recently deceased death row inmate Richard Ramirez was definitely one of the most famous serial killers of all time before he passed away of liver failure in California’s San Quentin State Prison.
After a dramatic arrest in 1985 in East Los Angeles by residents who recognized Ramirez from photographs displayed all over the news, Ramirez would sit in jail for years while awaiting a trial that finally began in 1989. There would be no more expensive trial in the history of Los Angeles County except for the O.J. Simpson trial that occurred a few years later.
At a cost of $1.8 million dollars, Los Angelinos would pay dearly for the privilege of trying Ramirez in a court of law. Incredibly, however, this massive sum wasn’t the only cost associated with this vicious serial killer. Because he was sentenced to death and due to the incredibly long appeals process associated with death row inmates, Ramirez sat in jail for over two decades without any fear of actually being put to death by the state of California.
Over the past hundred years, the number of individuals incarcerated in the United States has ballooned from a few hundred thousand people to almost 2.5 million prisoners. The most expensive people to incarcerate are death row inmates, who sit in a type of solitary confinement for decades. A moratorium on future executions in California has ensured that inmates like Ramirez have been costing taxpayers millions of dollars for housing and appeals with no likelihood of being put to death.
According to the American Civil Liberties Union, there are around 700 people sitting on death row in California, which require a massive investment of tax dollars. The state’s ongoing budget crisis and inability to balance its budget has put great strain on the prison system to house so many death row inmates at such an incredible cost.
Richard Ramirez’s untimely death at the age of 53 and his decades-long residency within a state prison brings to light a disturbing fact: more inmates die of natural causes while on death row than are actually put to death. Whether support for the death penalty exists or not, the billions of dollars spent by the state to keep inmates on death row has resulted in just 13 executions since the late 1970s.
A study in 2011 that was conducted by a judge and professor in the state suggested that California has spent over $4 billion since the death penalty was reinstituted. Out of those funds spent, at least a billion dollars was used for housing and incarceration of the inmates, including serial killers like Richard Ramirez.
A further study presented by the Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice in 2008 suggested that keeping the system intact with inmates on death row would cost around $137 million dollars a year. On the other hand, if California was to commute those death sentences to life in prison and abolish the death penalty, the yearly cost would drop to $11.5 million a year.
Offering the families of victims of death penalty-worthy crimes the chance to see a killer or other criminal experience the ultimate punishment may offer some sort of closure. Unfortunately, with the expectation that individuals on death row are more likely to die of natural causes than be put to death in California, the implementation of the death penalty in the state must be reexamined.
Related articles
GTA 5: Do Moving Release Dates Boost Sales?
Grand Theft Auto 5 is the upcoming gaming title developed by Rockstar Games, set in the . Grand Theft Auto has been a perennial classic and the definitive gaming series for Rockstar Games, creating the modern urban sandbox game and similar gaming titles such as Saint’s Row. The release date for GTA 5 was originally planned at the beginning of the year in spring 2013, but was pushed back to September 17. Does moving release dates have any noticeable effect on the sales of video games?
One of the most important effects of moving release dates is to afford the studio and developers of the game more time to put finishing touches on the game. Two examples of games being rushed by developers, possibly in order to meet release dates by studios, are Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3. In this case, moving the release date may appease anxious fans for a short amount of time, but the quality of the game may not hold up to expectations. This is particularly obvious in Mass Effect 3, where the lackluster ending stood out as an enormous drawback to the game and may even lower sales of future games planned in the Mass Effect universe. There was a huge divergence in the quality of the ending compared to the quality of the rest of the game that prompted many gamers to deduce that the ending to the game was rushed. This is particularly damaging to a game which has built up to the ending in the trilogy only to disappoint the gamers who have played through Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 to see the ending. The fiasco created by the ending even caused the studio to release another ending, although the damage may be permanent.
Otherwise, even late in the development cycle in a game, there are important stages for the game to go through such as bug testing, so that any potential bugs or glitches may be fixed before release. This is important particularly in AAA titles such as GTA 5, where fans have a great deal of expectations about the realism and immersion of the game itself, which can be broken by an abundance of bugs. In this case, it may be better for the studio to delay the release date instead of releasing a mediocre, or even worse, an unfinished product. It is particularly worthwhile for Rockstar Games to take their time considering that GTA 5 is one of their most important titles; it is of paramount importance for them to preserve the quality of the game rather than rush any part of the game’s release.
Finally, there is indication that moving the release date of games later can actually boost sales. If the delaying of the release date can result in a better product, the game can sell both on release and from pre-orders as well down the road, if it becomes critically acclaimed as a quality AAA game. One of the breakout success stories in gaming this year was Bioshock Infinite, released by Irrational Games which had its release date moved to February 26, 2013 from October 16, 2012. However, the ending of the game was almost universally regarded as one of the best in AAA titles, and it is conceivable that more games will be sold because of the higher quality.
